Aside from the planted commentary of one
fake document there is nothing indicated from Heartland thast represents «scandal».
Not exact matches
it presents itself as an uncontrollable need for attention, these people often
fake medical symptoms to get taken care of in the hospital, however,
there are also a lot of
documented cases where the person pretends to be posessed.
We found this out in 2017, but
there is no mention (of it) to the National Assembly even on the
fake documents.
Scammers often make the company look «real» -
there may be a website and
documents that look official but are completely
fake.
I recognize
there is still some outmoded thinking about e-signatures (as if faxes weren't essentially electronic
documents themselves, except easier to
fake than PDFs), but for general legal communications, where is the evidence?
Since a will is a public
document,
there is public interest in challenging a potentially
fake will, and the broad test, such as that applied in judicial review proceedings, should apply.
Increasingly, courts in the developed world only require an original rather than a scanned image or photocopy, in cases where the authenticity of the original is in doubt (i.e. where
there are facts that suggest that it is possible that the original is
fake or forged), but this is certainly not universal international practice for all purposes for which you might use a
document.
At a glance,
there may not be anything discernible between a real or
fake document.